Against Propertarianism
I have come to realize that almost all capitalist arguments eventually boil down to the idea of property rights. For the individual concerned with common sense, whose interests align with their immediate wellbeing and the wellbeing of their brethren, there is no reason to believe that a libertarian socialist society would result, at least in theory, in less equal and less fulfilling material conditions than current day capitalism. The right-wing libertarian, however, centers their entire political and philosophical framework around the concept of a right to property. Here I omit naturalist and theological arguments for property rights, as they seem to me nonsensical. Right-wing libertarians often present their position as the most “rational” political framework, mocking leftists for their apparent sentimental predisposition. But is this really so? We will see.
Murray Rothbard, the Jesus Christ of “anarcho”-capitalism, posits this framework of ethics as the alternative to utilitarianism, which he deems a defunct theory. The capitalist system of property-centered ethics, which can otherwise be denoted “propertarianism,” puts the ultimate emphasis on freedom, defined as a “condition in which a person’s ownership rights in his body and his legitimate material property rights are not invaded, are not aggressed against” (Rothbard, 41).
This definition, even in its own system, cannot guarantee any sort of “freedom” as understood in the common sense. Propertarians argue that, due to their definition of freedom, the conditions which exist between the worker and the capitalist is a “free contract” and ensures the maximum amount of propertarian freedom for both the capitalist, who owns the means of production and the method of sustenance for the worker, and the worker, who owns only his own body and labor. This claim is preposterous. Any self-proclaimed lover of “freedom”, a lover of human kind in general, cannot and should not be satisfied with only freedoms from and not also freedoms to. It is evident that the average laborer in a capitalist society do not actually possess the freedom to sustain themselves in a dignified way. What is the use for the freedom to eat food when one cannot even afford it?
What freedoms do the worker actually hold? Capitalists present this “free contract” as an agreement which both sides come to equal terms upon, but this simply is not true. Without this so-called contract, workers risk their entire livelihoods and the livelihoods of their family, while capitalists only risk becoming a worker. (As an aside, any argument for surplus value based in “risk-taking” is fundamentally based on propertarian positions as well, as the only things at risk for the capitalist is their capital.) It is well known that sexual relations, where one side has significantly more power than the other, is unethical and considered coercion. Sex between an adult and a child, the boss and the employee, are not considered “free contracts” simply because the powerless side has to concede to the powerful side for their own interest. This is a hierarchical relationship based on coercion, a relationship commonplace in capitalism, loved by the supposed “libertarians” and “proponents of freedom.”
The so-called freedom provided by the right to property is the greatest cause of suffering and, in reality, lack of freedoms for mankind. As Pierre Proudhon put it, “property and society are utterly irreconcilable institutions” (Proudhon, 93). The existence of property in any society only sets out to limit and constrain the production of all things by which human society is constructed. Property has also been, at its inception, based on power and not merit. The most powerful kings of antiquity could possess the greatest amount of land, the most influential knight the second greatest, and all of the kings’ sons and the knights’ sons who each get a share after the death of their fathers, and so on. We are all aware of the unfortunate fact, the fact that success in capitalism is based in not merit but inheritance and luck. The right-wing libertarians might argue that this is due to the interference of the state and “crony capitalism,” as they call it, but it is evident that capitalism and propertarianism as it stands today cannot exist without the violent enforcement of these private property laws by the state.
Where does this “right to property” even come from? With whose mandate do the capitalists lay claim to the means of production everywhere in the world? Did the capitalists create the factories which they own from their own labor? Even if they did, did they do it completely without the input of previous labor? Every tool that you use, every idea and innovation that you come up with, is the product of combined human labor of the society you live in. The education that you received growing up, the food you ate and are still eating now, the tools that you use in your labor, all contain the contributions of many hundreds if not thousands of laborers who either live alongside you or lived before you. The history of the human race has been a constant effort to improve conditions for ourselves and others through labor so innovation and progress can keep happening and keep the cycle going. As Peter Kropotkin put it, “by what right then can any one whatever appropriate the least morsel of this immense whole and say — this is mine, not yours?” (Kropotkin).
Why would the abolition of private property lead to more freedom, you ask? First, workers are free to work for their own interests, and are no longer coerced into giving up a portion of the fruits of their labor for people who do not work yet dictate how the workers should work. Collective ownership of property will also lead to an increased efficiency, as production is shifted from profit-based to being needs-based. Most importantly, a society based in solidarity will enable every individual to have an equal access to resources to fulfill their needs, and their lives will flourish socially and intellectually while working in solidarity with all other human beings in the complex and evolving conditions of the modern world. The ability to do all that is true freedom.
Sources:
Rothbard, M. N. (2020). For a new liberty the libertarian manifesto Murray N. Rothbard Aut. Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Proudhon, P.-J., & McKay, I. (2011). Property is theft!: A Pierre-Joseph Proudhon anthology. AK Press.
Kropotkin, P. (1892). The conquest of bread. The Anarchist Library. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-the-conquest-of-bread
